QUICK NEWS, 1-19: UTILITIES & SOLAR POWER PLANTS; LOOK FOR THE WINDMADE LABEL; DUKE-PROGRESS NUCLEAR MEGA-MERGER; EV CAN CLEAR AIR

UTILITIES & SOLAR POWER PLANTS
CSP garners favour with utilities; Utility partnerships and investments in CSP gathered pace in 2010, and market analysts expect power producers to look favourably on solar thermal this year as the technology establishes itself as the friendliest solar option for large-scale generation.
Bob Moser, 14 January 2011 (CSP Today)

"Concentrated solar power technology is winning investor confidence with its proven reliability and technical advancements that have led to economies of scale and investor progress over the past 12 months…[It] is likely to have a huge impact on utilities' outlook towards future projects…Within the last year…EBL (Elektra Baselland), a Swiss utility company…NRG Energy…[and] GDF SUEZ [invested in CSP]…

"A mere 0.03% of global electricity was generated by CSP in 2010, but the sector is growing quickly, with thousands of megawatts under construction or in planning throughout the world, including Europe, the US, North Africa and the Middle East. New interest is also blooming in China, Australia, Mexico and India. Power companies worldwide moved on CSP investments and partnerships…[Through] 2016… utility-owned or sponsored CSP capacity additions in the US [are forecast to] approach 6,360MW…"

click to enlarge

"CSP has some legitimate advantages on PV at scale that are winning over wavering utilities. Higher capacity factors allow CSP plants to produce more power per megawatt installation, and output of PV in the desert drops due to factors like extreme heat, losing as much as 15-20% productivity for a crystalline silicon panel…CSP also offers efficiency rates that solve intermittency problems that utilities fear with other renewables…CSP facilities with heat storage back-up…can provide base-load electricity. That's a main motivation [as are RPS deadlines] for utilities to either own CSP facilities or strengthen ties through Power Purchase Agreements with third parties…

"A key indicator on the trend of utility investment in solar thermal is that it hasn't been taking place through the rate-base, but instead through independent power production subsidiaries…These are still, to an extent, opportunistic investments that are relatively risky but high-reward, instead of more conventional utility investments that are less risky but offer lower reward…This trend can continue this year…[But it is not clear] CSP will win favoritism in the short-term over other renewables…"

click to enlarge

"Fixed-price payment deals have a strategic significance for utilities entering pacts with a CSP provider, as it lets them hedge against volatile energy prices. Natural gas prices in 2009 dropped due to the economic crisis, but rebounded in 2010. This is one underlying motivation for utilities to turn increased attention to renewables…

"Established feed-in tariffs and federally guaranteed loans remain vital to solar's growth in 2011 and beyond. Photovoltaic and CSP generation remains just below US$200/MWh, nearly four times the cost of coal-fired energy at US$56/MWh. It is also two to four times more expensive than the cost of onshore wind power…Legislation such as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act favor CSP technology over wind, by providing three-year Production Tax Credit extensions for CSP, compared to two-year extensions for wind power…"


LOOK FOR THE WINDMADE LABEL
'WindMade' joins growing list of green product labels
Wendy Koch, January 18, 2011 (USA Today)

"Move over "certified organic" and "fair trade." [There is a] new eco-friendly label, "WindMade," … for companies and products using wind energy.

"The new label, developed by businesses and conservation organizations to promote wind power…will require companies to undergo a certification process to verify how much wind energy they use and will be managed by a non-profit group."

click to enlarge

[Steve Sawyer, secretary general, Global Wind Energy Council/interim CEO, WindMade:] "Governments are dragging their feet, but consumers want to see change now. ...With WindMade, we want to facilitate the change that the public demands…"

"Also joining in the WindMade effort is conservation group WWF, the LEGO Group, the UN Global Compact, Vestas Wind Systems, PricewaterhouseCoopers and Bloomberg. Sponsors says more WindMade's details will follow at the [February] World Economic Forum in Davos…"


DUKE-PROGRESS NUCLEAR MEGA-MERGER
Nuclear goals stoked by Duke-Progress merger
John Murawski and Bruce Henderson, January 17, 2011 (The News & Observer)

"The merger between Duke Energy and Progress Energy [into a new Duke Energy that will be the country's largest utility] makes it likelier that a new nuclear reactor would be built in the Carolinas in the next 10 years. It also means that customers could pay higher bills almost immediately to get a reactor built.

"But the corporate financing advantages that come with sheer size don't minimize the risks and challenges ahead. The merger is still at least a year from being finalized, but [Duke CEO Jim Rogers and Progress CEO Bill Johnson] have already agreed to work together to change North Carolina's laws to allow a power company to raise rates without having to go through lengthy proceedings…[They] readily acknowledge that any future nuclear project will be daunting, even to a company as large as the new Duke will be. But they also say they have no choice but to take that risk…"

click to enlarge

"The first obstacle facing nuclear expansion is North Carolina's law. Currently, utilities can request a rate increase to pay for a plant each year while the plant is being built, but these requests lead to [contention]…The other option is to recover the costs after the plant is built, but…[10 years or more of] interest payments add hundreds of millions of dollars to the project…Recovering the money annually would ultimately benefit customers, because interest payments would be lower. But critics say that changing the law would have another effect: It would encourage power companies to gamble on nuclear plants and take unnecessary risks with their customers' money…The costs to customers could be substantial…

"But a change in North Carolina's law is just the first step. A nuclear budget is so enormous that Duke would have to bring in an outside partner to help finance the undertaking, which is expected to cost more than $20 billion for a pair of reactors.
Already, Duke expects to spend $459 million in pre-construction costs for the William Lee site by 2013, when it expects to get a federal operating license. Progress has spent $48.9 million on the federal license application for new reactors at Shearon Harris."

click to enlarge

"Further complicating the nuclear equation is the uncertainty of future demand for electricity. In past years, the power industry has overestimated future needs. In the past several years, demand has slacked off, making it harder to justify the expense of nuclear plants to Wall Street investors and to state regulators who would have to approve the project…Johnson and Rogers see nuclear expansion as the only viable option to meet North Carolina's future energy demand, even if demand projections are off. That's because the nation will have to start replacing dozens of aging coal-burning power plants and older nuclear plants, which are slated for retirement in the coming decades…

"Since coal-burning power plants stand little chance of public acceptance, given concerns about pollution and climate change, the only remaining option for round-the-clock electricity generation is nuclear power, which generates no greenhouse gases and no air emissions, utilities say…[I]ncreasing the size of a utility improves its financial prospects. Mergers are almost always seen as positive developments that will help utilities finance new nuclear plants, digital power grids, transmission system upgrades, routine maintenance and other projects…For nuclear watchdogs, it makes little difference whether a nuclear plant belongs to Progress alone or a Duke-Progress combination. Both companies have had average performance, said David Lochbaum, director of the nuclear safety project at the Union of Concerned Scientists…"


EV CAN CLEAR AIR
Are electric vehicles answer to valley smog?
Streven Mayer, January 18, 2011 (The Bakersfield Californian)

"…In recent weeks, two mass-market electric vehicles, a Nissan Leaf and a Chevrolet Volt, were delivered to private [Bakersfield] owners…

"Nissan says the Leaf can travel up to 100 miles on a full charge. The Volt's electric range is shorter, about 40 miles, but it includes a small gasoline engine that will recharge the car's batteries, essentially giving it an unlimited range…The price of the Leaf, depending on the model, starts at approximately $33,000. The Volt lists at about $41,000. But both buyers will benefit from a federal income tax credit of $7,500, bringing the net cost down substantially…[E]lectric charging stations [are] in place…[and there are] plans to install [more]…"

click to enlarge

"The bottom line for both plug-in vehicles appears to be a per-mile fuel cost that is significantly lower than average gas-powered vehicles. And if the cost of gasoline climbs to $5 per gallon, as some analysts have predicted, the cost gap will widen…But there's another factor both dealers are touting… the San Joaquin Valley's topography and climate act like a bowl that is notorious for holding in smog-producing pollutants, making the valley's air some of the worst in the nation…Could the electric car save us from ourselves?

"…To that end, the air district is looking at subsidizing the installation of quick-charging stations at key points to make longer travel more feasible. They are also offering a $1,000 to $3,000 incentive for valley residents who purchase a Leaf…The Volt has not been incentivized for a couple of reasons…The gasoline reserve tank means the Volt is not 100 percent electric. And the buzz surrounding the Volt being awarded Motor Trend's Car of the Year -- along with current limited availability -- means sales probably wouldn't benefit from an added incentive…"

click to enlarge

"…[E]lectric cars cannot claim to be "emissions free" if they are powered from an energy grid supplied by power stations burning coal or gas…Nevertheless, electric vehicles still represent a net reduction in the ozone-forming emissions that are a problem here in the valley every summer…Seventy to 80 percent of smog-forming gases in the valley come from mobile sources, including cars…

"[R]educing smog from…[autos] can indeed make a healthy difference…But the emissions from cars and light trucks represent less than 20 percent of the total mobile emissions, while heavy-duty trucks emit some 40 percent of the primary smog-forming gas. Off-road construction, industrial and farm vehicles together also emit more…[But] cutting emissions by driving electric cars and other low-emission vehicles…can make a difference…"